Banned wagon
A weekly survey of the things our rulers want to prohibit
FEW of us have not at one time or another, when faced with some minor irritation, cried out in frustration, 'Why isn't there a law against it?' Our law- makers, we hope, will always take a more considered view, balancing liberty against the elimination of the public menace involved. Unfortunately, though, things do not always happen that way. One of the little annoyances of mod- ern life, mentioned before in these pages, is the way that catering chains replace long-established public-house names with rather silly concocted ones like the 'Slug and Lettuce' or 'Ferret and Trouser Leg'. Pub names belong to neighbourhoods, so what right do Messrs Mega Inns have to take them away from us? Like Henry II muttering to his noble- men Will no one rid me of this turbu- lent priest?', we never really intended that government should act on our whimsical suggestion. But it has. Parlia- ment has been presented with the Pub- lic House Names Bill, which will oblige pub owners to seek consent from local authorities before being allowed to rename their hostelries.
As soon as you see it written out in full pomp — 'Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal. . . ' — it does make you question: is it really the business of the state to decide what pubs should be called? If this legislation is passed, it would then be illogical to stop with public houses — how long before the state starts deciding what we should call our businesses, shops and private houses?
`I'm sorry, sir, but the authority con- siders your property has long been known as Norman's Nest, and to change it would detract from the char- acter of the local area.'
Ross Clark
Previous page
